Subscriber Benefit
As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe Now
By most accounts, the state’s immigration attorneys were pleased when the Indianapolis immigration court opened in January inside the Minton-Capehart Federal Building.
After several delays, the court’s arrival made it the first court of its kind to operate in the state. Previously, Indiana-based immigration cases were heard in Chicago.
But for some immigration attorneys, like Vicki Fortino, there are mounting frustrations with how the new court operates.
“If you call the Indianapolis immigration court, you could call every day, every hour for the next two weeks and no one will answer,” Fortino said.
Fortino, an attorney with Indianapolis-based Hocker Law, said it’s exceedingly difficult to find an actual staff person, besides the immigration judges, on site at the downtown court.
She noted that if she drafts a case motion, it generally has to be manually accepted by someone at the court.
Fortino said she’s not aware of any staff working on site at the court.
Sarah Burrow, director at Lewis & Kappes and president of the Indiana chapter of the American Immigration Lawyers Association, said she was only aware of one staff person working on-site at the Indianapolis court.
“I think just having one staff person handle everything right now is very challenging,” Burrow said.
John Martinan, a public information officer for the Executive Office for Immigration Review, did not respond directly to The Indiana Lawyer’s questions about the number of staff that has been hired at the Indianapolis court.
“Opening in late January, the Indianapolis Immigration Court currently has seven immigration judges, including the supervisory immigration judge, as well as support staff,” Martin said in an email.
He said the opening of the Indianapolis immigration court transferred 50,400 cases from the Chicago immigration court, resulting in a 19 percent reduction in pending cases for the Chicago court at that time.
Martin said, additionally, the reduction in caseload has allowed respondents to be scheduled for earlier hearing slots.
The Lawyer also asked if any of the initial immigration judges hired for Indianapolis had been let go, due to news reports that such things had happened elsewhere. Martin said his agency wouldn’t comment on personnel matters.
Attorneys describe differences between Indianapolis, Chicago courts
The Indianapolis court’s opening came as the nation is still dealing with an immense backlog of immigration cases.
Syracuse University’s Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse reported that at the end of March 2025, 3,629,627 active cases were pending before the nation’s immigration courts.
Immigration courts recorded receiving 349,165 new cases and closing 460,682 cases so far in Fiscal Year 2025.
Through October of last year, there were more than 72,000 pending immigration cases in Indiana based on the immigrant’s address.
Fortino described her experiences with the new court as good and bad, with most of the immigration judges being helpful.
“They all seem to be fair and listen to the case and work with us,” Fortino said.
She said she thought the Indianapolis immigration judges were aware of the on-site staffing problems and the frustrations attorneys are experiencing.
Burrow described the court’s operations so far as “a little touch-and-go.”
She said she believes a lack of staffing has resulted in pretty significant delays with adjudication of motions and administrative matters.
Burrow said she still has some clients, with Indiana addresses, that still have their cases listed in the Chicago immigration court.
“We’re still doing hearings virtually, even though the court is a few blocks from our office,” Burrow said. That’s a contrast from Chicago operations, where for the most part, government attorneys appeared in court.
Burrow said the Immigration and Customs Enforcement attorneys in the virtual hearings are generally not based locally.
Another issue Burrow has with the new court is what she describes as unclear signage, with signs only in English to direct visitors to the immigration court.
Burrow said in Chicago’s court, there are signs in several different languages to assist visitors.
She acknowledged that one issue in Chicago is difficulty finding parking spaces.
“So I was really encouraged when Indianapolis got an immigration court. It’s more manageable for people,” Burrow said.
Will court operations improve?
The opening of the Indianapolis immigration court was long overdue, said Karina Zazueta, an Indianapolis immigration attorney and solo practitioner.
Like Burrow and Fortino, she has found the court’s staff to be, in general, nonresponsive.
“It’s been a challenge,” Zazueta said.
She said that while the Indianapolis court is not operating at the level of Chicago’s court, all of the courts are dealing with a massive amount of cases.
Zazueta said not all of her cases with clients have been transferred from Chicago to Indianapolis.
“Some of the cases, we’ve been waiting years and years to have a final hearing,” Zazueta said.
She described the court’s downtown location as convenient but added that a lot of her cases in Indianapolis have been delayed or rescheduled.
Some clients are also concerned about what could happen if they show up to court, Zazueta said.
The Associated Press reported that a flurry of immigration enforcement at courthouses around the country in the past month had advocates fearing people might avoid coming to court.
In North Carolina, ICE confirmed it arrested four people at a county courthouse, prompting the sheriff to express concerns about a lack of communication from the agency as well as about disruption to court proceedings.
“These are very different times for everybody,” Zazueta said.
The Indianapolis attorney called it a “vicious cycle,” with some people too afraid to show up to court and ending up with orders of removal.
Whatever frustrations she’s had so far, Zazueta said she feels there’s still great potential for the Indianapolis court.
With a growing immigrant population, Indianapolis and the rest of the state needs it, she said.
The hardest part was getting it open, Zazueta stressed.
In spite of new courts being added across the country, Burrow said she didn’t have a lot of faith that conditions at the Indianapolis court will improve under the Trump administration.
“They say it’s to reduce the courts’ backlogs and improve efficiency, but in practice that’s not what’s happening,” Burrow said.•
Please enable JavaScript to view this content.